Gathered all the decent data I had of Rho O. It was about 30+of 4 min exposures in each of RGB and about 8 at 8 min.
It seems that if the light pollution/gradients varies over a set of subs it is problematic to use any rejection. If you do then a lot of data is thrown out with the cosmic rays and satellites etc. This is far worse when trying to meld data taken on different nights. Wide fields suffer far more due to varying gradients with target elevation.
If I use rejection all the dim dust and nebulosity disappears. PixInsight can give you images of the rejected pixels and it is obvious when real data is being rejected.
What I am doing is processing different sets of data with PixInsight to see what works. It is the integration step where it is critical to set the correct rejection criteria including none!
This image is just an average of the data weighted by exposure. 10 MB
http://d1355990.i49.quadrahosting.co...4/RhoO_RGB.jpg
The FoV is 3.3 x 3.3 degrees.
As you can see there is a lot of dim dust far clearer than I have been able to produce in the past from the same data. If you look carefully there are quite a few asteroids and satellites as well as bright cosmic rays.
I have not used any noise reduction.
Bert